MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2594513119 · doi:10.1139/cjm-2016-0603

The oral cavity microbiota: between health, oral disease, and cancers of the aerodigestive tract

2017· review· en· W2594513119 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Pierre Le Bars, Sébastien Matamoros, Emmanuel Montassier, Françoise Le Vacon, G. Potel, Assem Soueidan, Fabienne Jordana, Marie-France de la Cochetière

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Microbiology · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOral microbiology and periodontitis research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOral cavityOral healthDiseaseGastrointestinal tractMedicineGut floraBiologyMicrobiologyInternal medicineImmunologyDentistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many studies show that the human microbiome plays a critical role in the chronic pathologies of obesity, inflammatory bowel diseases, and diabetes. More recently, the interaction between cancer and the microbiome has been highlighted. Most studies have focused on the gut microbiota because it represents the most extensive bacterial community, and the body of evidence correlating it with gut syndromes is increasing. However, in the strict sense, the gastrointestinal (GI) tract begins in the oral cavity, and special attention should be paid to the specific flora of this cavity. This study reviewed the current knowledge about the various microbial ecosystems of the upper part of the GI tract and discussed their potential link to carcinogenesis. The overall composition of the microbial communities, as well as the presence or absence of "key species", in relation to carcinogenesis is addressed. Alterations in the oral microbiota can potentially be used to predict the risk of cancer. Molecular advances and the further monitoring of the microbiota will increase our understanding of the role of the microbiota in carcinogenesis and open new perspectives for future therapeutic and prophylactic modalities.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.884
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.101
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations108
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of MicrobiologySame topicOral microbiology and periodontitis researchFrench-language works237,207